Dean v Collins [No 2]

[2015] WASCA 151

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Succession
2. › Family provision
3. › Adequate provision for proper maintenance, support, education and advancement in life
4. › Jurisdictional question
5. › Two-stage process
6. › Whether applicant must demonstrate needs greater than named beneficiaries
7. › Family Provision Act 1972 (WA), s 6(1)
1. Succession
2. › Family provision
3. › Small estates
4. › Competing claims of modest means
5. › Relative needs of claimant and beneficiaries
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Family provision proceedings
4. › Whether costs borne by estate or unsuccessful beneficiaries
5. › Effect of Calderbank offer
6. › Family Provision Act 1972 (WA)
1. Appeal
2. › Extension of time
3. › Delay caused by without prejudice negotiations
4. › Proportionality of appeal costs to estate value

Quick Take

The jurisdictional question under s 6(1) of the Family Provision Act 1972 (WA) does not require an applicant to demonstrate that her or his needs are greater than those of the named beneficiaries under the will. Where an applicant's financial need is 'obvious' and the will makes no provision for the applicant, the jurisdictional question is satisfied. The general policy of the court is that costs of family provision proceedings are borne by the unsuccessful beneficiaries, not the estate.